如果有人想花时间来反转你的二进制文件，那么你绝对无法阻止他们。你可以适度增加难度，但仅此而已。如果您真的想了解这一点，请获取http://www.hex-rays.com/idapro/的副本并分解一些二进制文件。

CPU需要执行代码的事实是你的失败。CPU只执行机器代码…程序员可以阅读机器代码。

话虽如此……你可能有不同的问题，可以用另一种方式解决。你想保护什么?根据您的问题，您可以使用加密来保护您的产品。

有一件事到目前为止还没有被提及:

您可以在自己的端(服务器端，例如由REST API调用)运行部分代码。这样，逆向工程师就完全无法访问代码。

当然，这只适用于

延迟 交通量 计算和I/O功率 隐私问题

不会阻止服务器端执行(部分)您的代码。

最好的反反汇编技巧，特别是在可变字长指令集上，是在汇编程序/机器代码中，而不是在c中

CLC
BCC over
.byte 0x09
over:

The disassembler has to resolve the problem that a branch destination is the second byte in a multi byte instruction. An instruction set simulator will have no problem though. Branching to computed addresses, which you can cause from C, also make the disassembly difficult to impossible. Instruction set simulator will have no problem with it. Using a simulator to sort out branch destinations for you can aid the disassembly process. Compiled code is relatively clean and easy for a disassembler. So I think some assembly is required.

I think it was near the beginning of Michael Abrash's Zen of Assembly Language where he showed a simple anti disassembler and anti-debugger trick. The 8088/6 had a prefetch queue what you did was have an instruction that modified the next instruction or a couple ahead. If single stepping then you executed the modified instruction, if your instruction set simulator did not simulate the hardware completely, you executed the modified instruction. On real hardware running normally the real instruction would already be in the queue and the modified memory location wouldnt cause any damage so long as you didnt execute that string of instructions again. You could probably still use a trick like this today as pipelined processors fetch the next instruction. Or if you know that the hardware has a separate instruction and data cache you can modify a number of bytes ahead if you align this code in the cache line properly, the modified byte will not be written through the instruction cache but the data cache, and an instruction set simulator that did not have proper cache simulators would fail to execute properly. I think software only solutions are not going to get you very far.

上面这些都是老的和众所周知的，我对当前的工具了解不够，不知道它们是否已经围绕这些事情工作了。自修改代码可能/将使调试器出错，但是人类可以/将缩小问题范围，然后看到自修改代码并解决它。

It used to be that the hackers would take about 18 months to work something out, dvds for example. Now they are averaging around 2 days to 2 weeks (if motivated) (blue ray, iphones, etc). That means to me if I spend more than a few days on security, I am likely wasting my time. The only real security you will get is through hardware (for example your instructions are encrypted and only the processor core well inside the chip decrypts just before execution, in a way that it cannot expose the decrypted instructions). That might buy you months instead of days.

另外，读读凯文·米特尼克的《欺骗的艺术》。这样的人可以拿起电话，让你或同事把秘密交给系统，以为那是公司其他部门的经理、其他同事或硬件工程师。你的安全系统也被破坏了。安全不仅仅是管理技术，还要管理人。

关于隐藏代码要记住的第一件事:不是所有的代码都需要隐藏。

最终目标:我对大多数软件程序的最终目标是能够出售不同的许可证，这些许可证将打开和关闭我的程序中的特定功能。

最佳技术:我发现构建一个像WordPress提供的钩子和过滤器系统，绝对是迷惑对手的最佳方法。这允许您加密某些触发器关联，而无需实际加密代码。

这样做的原因是，您希望加密尽可能少的代码。

了解你的破解者:了解这一点:破解代码的主要原因不是因为恶意分发许可，实际上是因为需要更改你的代码，而他们真的不需要分发免费副本。

入门:撇开少量要加密的代码，其余的代码应该尝试塞到一个文件中，以增加复杂性和可理解性。

准备加密:你将在我的系统中分层加密，这也将是一个非常复杂的过程，所以构建另一个程序来负责加密过程。

第一步:使用base64名称来混淆所有内容。完成之后，将混淆的代码base64，并将其保存到一个临时文件中，该文件稍后将用于解密和运行此代码。有意义吗?

我重复一遍，因为你会一次又一次地这样做。您将创建一个base64字符串，并将其保存到另一个文件中，作为将被解密和呈现的变量。

第二步:您将把这个临时文件作为一个字符串读入并混淆它，然后将它作为base64并将其保存到第二个临时文件中，该文件将用于解密并为最终用户呈现它。

第三步:重复第二步，你想重复多少次都行。一旦你让它正常工作，没有解密错误，然后你就会想要开始为你的对手埋地雷。

雷区一:你一定要把你收到通知这件事绝对保密。因此，在第2层构建一个破解尝试安全警告邮件系统。这将让你知道你的对手的细节，如果有任何事情是错误的。

地雷二:依赖。你不希望你的对手能够运行第1层，而没有第3层、第4层或第5层，甚至没有实际设计的程序。因此，请确保在第一层中包含某种终止脚本，如果程序不存在，该脚本将被激活，或在其他层中。

我相信你能想出你自己的地雷，玩得开心。

需要记住的事情:你可以加密你的代码，而不是base64。这样，简单的base64就不会解密程序。

奖励:记住，这实际上是你和对手之间的一种共生关系。我总是在第一层里面放一条评论，评论祝贺破解者，并给他们一个促销码，以便从你那里获得现金奖励。

让现金奖励意义重大，但不涉及偏见。我通常会说500美元左右。如果你的男朋友是第一个破解密码的人，那就付钱给他，成为他的朋友。如果他是你的朋友，他就不会分发你的软件。问问他是怎么做到的，你可以如何改进!

好运！

但只要有合适的时间框架，代码分析人员都可以解决这些问题。

如果你给人们一个他们能够运行的程序，那么只要有足够的时间，他们也能够对它进行逆向工程。这就是程序的本质。一旦二进制文件可供想要破译它的人使用，您就无法阻止最终的逆向工程。毕竟，计算机必须能够破译它才能运行它，而人类只是一台较慢的计算机。

正如很多人已经说过的:在一个普通的CPU上，你不能阻止它们，你只能延迟它们。就像我以前的密码学老师告诉我的那样:你不需要完美的加密，破解密码的代价肯定比获得的代价更大。你的困惑也是一样。

但还有3个注意事项:

It is possible to make reverse engineering impossible, BUT (and this is a very very big but), you cant do it on a conventional cpu. I did also much hardware development, and often FPGA are used. E.g. the Virtex 5 FX have a PowerPC CPU on them, and you can use the APU to implement own CPU opcodes in your hardware. You could use this facility to really decrypt incstuctions for the PowerPC, that is not accessible by the outside or other software, or even execute the command in the hardware. As the FPGA has builtin AES encryption for its configuration bitstream, you could not reverse engineer it (except someone manages to break AES, but then I guess we have other problems...). This ways vendors of hardware IP also protect their work. You speak from protocol. You dont say what kind of protocol it is, but when it is a network protocol you should at least protect it against network sniffing. This can you indeed do by encryption. But if you want to protect the en/decryption from an owner of the software, you are back to the obfuscation. Do make your programm undebuggable/unrunnable. Try to use some kind of detection of debugging and apply it e.g. in some formula oder adding a debug register content to a magic constant. It is much harder if your program looks in debug mode is if it where running normal, but makes a complete wrong computation, operation, or some other. E.g. I know some eco games, that had a really nasty copy-protection (I know you dont want copyprotection, but it is similar): The stolen version altered the mined resources after 30 mins of game play, and suddenly you got just a single resource. The pirate just cracked it (i.e. reverse engineered it) - checked if it run, and volia released it. Such slight behaviour changings are very hard to detect, esp. if they do not appear instantly to detection, but only delayed.

所以最后我想建议: 估算逆向工程人员的收益，将其转化为一些时间(例如，使用最便宜的印度工资)，并进行逆向工程，使时间成本更大。